Immigration Bill & Obamacare – Incentive to hire immigrants instead of citizens
I’ll be the first one to tell you I have had little or no time to review the current immigration “fix” legislation, but this does not sound good at all. A week ago, journalists started looking into how the Obamacare rules would apply to new immigrants who will have become legalized. It seems employers would have a financial incentive to hire immigrant workers instead of American citizens.
Over at the Washington Examiner a week ago, Philip Klein wrote…
As I’ve outlined previously, under Obamacare, businesses with over 50 workers that employ American citizens without offering them qualifying health insurance could be subject to fines of up to $3,000 per worker. But because newly legalized immigrants wouldn’t be eligible for subsidies on the Obamacare exchanges until after they become citizens – at least 13 years under the Senate bill – businesses could avoid such fines by hiring the new immigrants instead.
Go back and read that again.
This afternoon, The Weekly Standard started asking a pretty simple question to five senators – including Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) – about this particular issue, and not one of them had an answer. You’d think this would be a question that should be answered, but these senators are so hot to pass this legislation, they really don’t care what it will do, and they voted to cut-off the debate on this legislation last night.
Could the problem be fixed? Sure. But again we see the rush to get thousands of pages of legislation pushed through just with the goal of getting “something” done. Think we’re putting on a tin-foil hat? Oh no we are not.
… The New Republic, Investors’ Business Daily, and the Washington Examiner have all reported that the bill certainly does create an incentive for some employers to hire “registered provisional immigrants” instead of U.S. citizens. The Washington Post‘s Glenn Kessler wrote that the claim is false, but then he updated his article to admit he was wrong.
Trust me, I don’t even have to look. This will be another train wreck. AP at Hot Air writes…
They voted to end debate on a bill without knowing for sure if it gives employers a huge incentive to hire illegals over Americans? What?
1 Comments
The website's content and articles were migrated to a new framework in October 2023. You may see [shortcodes in brackets] that do not make any sense. Please ignore that stuff. We may fix it at some point, but we do not have the time now.
You'll also note comments migrated over may have misplaced question marks and missing spaces. All comments were migrated, but trackbacks may not show.
The site is not broken.
So, once again, our vaunted “representatives” are voting on a bill about which they know little more than the fanciful name.? Do you see a trend here?? If a bill is too big to read before being voted on, does anyone (other than Harry Reid) think debate should be quashed and the bill put up for a vote?? Is the “problem” that pressing?? (no)? Are the Democrats worried that the public, unlike the Senators, will actually find out what is in the bill and find it singularly unpalatable??
?
Why do we always have to pass a bill before we can find out what is in it??? Isn’t this simply bass ackwards?? Isn’t it time for these jerks to actually do their job?? Will it require term limits or the ability to recall our so called representatives who can’t seem to muster the time to do their job properly??